Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious - are there any actual lawyers on here that disagree with the verdict?

You would would have to either be a horrible lawyer or blindly biased to be a lawyer and think the verdict was wrong. As a lawyer, I can tell you think was actually an insanely obvious outcome. The only thing that made the outcome questionable was all the politics surrounding it and not knowing if the jury would do the right thing

The problem is that this outcome means that anyone can go to some random town, wave an AR-15 around at people and provoke them, and then shoot and kill them when they come after you. And get off for it.
This is NOT a good outcome for America. It only escalates us toward even more violence and bloodshed, in case you haven't figured that out yet.

And what happens when the extreme left starts using this same tactic?

No, it doesn’t. It means you can’t go running after someone trying to threaten them and trying to hit them over the head with a skateboard, stomp in their face, point a gun at them or any of the above. If you do, and they happen to be armed, they may just be in the right to shoot and kill you. I’m fine with that. Don’t be a damn aggressor

[Anonymous]

It’s over no double jeopardy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a clown world like this the 17 year old half Hispanic boy is a white supremacist for killing a 36 year old child rapist with a shaved head who was screaming n words earlier in the night on tape and just got arrested for beating his girlfriend.

You clowns really want to call Rosenbaum an ally? Really??!

PREACH!!!! Honestly, people here are sounding as ridiculous as that QShaman dude on Jan 6

Kyle Rittenhouse was raised in a home with an Alcoholic father- later a broken home= low self esteem, pent up rage and looking for someone to act out on

Its a well known fact that the most criminals in this country were raised in homes with substance abuse/ broken homes, single parents

His mom has no education

Does his mom know how to use proper punctuation and conjunctions? You don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a clown world like this the 17 year old half Hispanic boy is a white supremacist for killing a 36 year old child rapist with a shaved head who was screaming n words earlier in the night on tape and just got arrested for beating his girlfriend.

You clowns really want to call Rosenbaum an ally? Really??!

PREACH!!!! Honestly, people here are sounding as ridiculous as that QShaman dude on Jan 6

Kyle Rittenhouse was raised in a home with an Alcoholic and drug addicted father, who beat his mother- later a broken home= low self esteem, pent up rage and looking for someone to act out on

Its a well known fact that the most criminals in this country were raised in homes with substance abuse/ broken homes, single parents

https://heavy.com/news/michael-mike-rittenhouse-kyle-father/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully Justice Dept gets involved. The President’s language of “angry and concerned” should be enough for them to start moving on Rittenhouse.

there is no basis for them to get involved. What is the violation?

Uh, let’s see…. Murder? Crossing state lines with intent to commit murder? Violating the civil rights of protesters? Possession of an illegal gun?

Should I go on or is that enough to get you to S T F U ?

Wow, I’m embarrassed for you to speak so confidentially about things you are so wrong about. Your lack of knowledge about the facts is stark.

- didn’t cross state lines
- 0 evidence of intent to murder
- not an illegal gun and not illegal for him to have it
- don’t even know what the heck you are talking about re civil rights

FACT: Rittenhouse DID cross state lines
FACT: Rittenhouse was on video a few days prior saying he wished he had his AR while safely watching some protesters from afar with no immediate threat to him (intent to kill).

But of course this was a sham of a trial.

If you think a statement like that made days earlier shows an intent to kill in this case then (besides being a complete idiot when it comes to the law) you have to concede that Rittenhouse was in the right for fearing for his life when a guy who less than an hour earlier threatened to kill Rittenhouse was chasing after him and reaching for his gun right as a gun shot goes off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a clown world like this the 17 year old half Hispanic boy is a white supremacist for killing a 36 year old child rapist with a shaved head who was screaming n words earlier in the night on tape and just got arrested for beating his girlfriend.

You clowns really want to call Rosenbaum an ally? Really??!

PREACH!!!! Honestly, people here are sounding as ridiculous as that QShaman dude on Jan 6

Kyle Rittenhouse was raised in a home with an Alcoholic father- later a broken home= low self esteem, pent up rage and looking for someone to act out on

Its a well known fact that the most criminals in this country were raised in homes with substance abuse/ broken homes, single parents

His mom has no education

. He’s a cherub angel compared to who he smoked on the lawless streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s over no double jeopardy

Not if they bring federal charges genius.
Civil lawsuits.
Not necessarily over.

[Anonymous]

That most of you geniuses on here apply and Kyle getting off with the same ones who justified to me a race getting shot and killed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That most of you geniuses on here apply and Kyle getting off with the same ones who justified to me a race getting shot and killed.

Ummm, what? 😳

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That most of you geniuses on here apply and Kyle getting off with the same ones who justified to me a race getting shot and killed.

Can you rephrase that please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That most of you geniuses on here apply and Kyle getting off with the same ones who justified to me a race getting shot and killed.

Something happened to your syntax, friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That most of you geniuses on here apply and Kyle getting off with the same ones who justified to me a race getting shot and killed.

Lol, wut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully Justice Dept gets involved. The President’s language of “angry and concerned” should be enough for them to start moving on Rittenhouse.

there is no basis for them to get involved. What is the violation?

Uh, let’s see…. Murder? Crossing state lines with intent to commit murder? Violating the civil rights of protesters? Possession of an illegal gun?

Should I go on or is that enough to get you to S T F U ?

Wow, I’m embarrassed for you to speak so confidentially about things you are so wrong about. Your lack of knowledge about the facts is stark.

- didn’t cross state lines
- 0 evidence of intent to murder
- not an illegal gun and not illegal for him to have it
- don’t even know what the heck you are talking about re civil rights

FACT: Rittenhouse DID cross state lines
FACT: Rittenhouse was on video a few days prior saying he wished he had his AR while safely watching some protesters from afar with no immediate threat to him (intent to kill).

But of course this was a sham of a trial.

FACT: Crossing state lines is NOT a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully Justice Dept gets involved. The President’s language of “angry and concerned” should be enough for them to start moving on Rittenhouse.

there is no basis for them to get involved. What is the violation?

Uh, let’s see…. Murder? Crossing state lines with intent to commit murder? Violating the civil rights of protesters? Possession of an illegal gun?

Should I go on or is that enough to get you to S T F U ?

Wow, I’m embarrassed for you to speak so confidentially about things you are so wrong about. Your lack of knowledge about the facts is stark.

- didn’t cross state lines
- 0 evidence of intent to murder
- not an illegal gun and not illegal for him to have it
- don’t even know what the heck you are talking about re civil rights

FACT: Rittenhouse DID cross state lines
FACT: Rittenhouse was on video a few days prior saying he wished he had his AR while safely watching some protesters from afar with no immediate threat to him (intent to kill).

But of course this was a sham of a trial.

FACT: Crossing state lines is NOT a crime.

.... yet!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s over no double jeopardy

Not if they bring federal charges genius.
Civil lawsuits.
Not necessarily over.

There are no federal charges to be had here. And any civil lawsuits will go nowhere. Do you really think the guy with a lengthy criminal record who was shot only after rushing at Rittenhouse with a gun in his hand is going to win a lawsuit? That nonsense will get laughed out of court and rightfully so.